., June 25, 1975. ^ Kleber, John E. (2001), 'Gottschalk, Louis Reichenthal', The encyclopedia of Louisville, Volume 2000, University Press of Kentucky, p. 346,.
^ Stewart, John Hall (1970), 'Louis Gottschalk and Lafayette', The Journal of Modern History, 42 (4): 637–648,:,. Review of Gottschalk and Maddox, Laffayette in the French Revolution: Through the October Days, University of Chicago Press, 1969. University of Chicago Library. Retrieved 2010-08-04. ^ Crocker, Lester G. Gottschalk (1899–1975)'. American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies Professional Notes.
Eighteenth-Century Studies. 9 (3): 474–476., Dwayne Cox, William James Morison, University Press of Kentucky, 1999,., Volume 2000, John E. Kleber., AHA. Retrieved 2010-08-04. Parini, Jay (2004), The Oxford Encyclopedia of American Literature: William Faulkner – Mina Loy, Oxford University Press, p. 285,. Retrieved 2010-08-04.
2010-06-09 at the., ACECS, retrieved 2010-08-06. Additional reading. 'Louis R. Gottschalk', Year Book 1975, 1976, pp. 55–58.
Examples Of Historical Method
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: SHORTER NOTICES 87 historic rightsof Englishmen but not in the moretheoretical rightsof man. The excerpts in whichthese ideasandbeliefs areembo.ed,varying in length froma single sentence orepigram toseveral pages, arechosen toillustrate also the historic evolution of Conservatism from,the French Revolution,tothe presen.t, from Burkeand Coleridge to T.S.
Eliot and QuintinHogg. Peelis drawnuponextensively to present the attitude of Co-hservatism to political change in theAgeof Reform, Disraeli andLordRandolph Churchill toexplain ToryDemocracy, Disraeli andJoseph Chamberlain to put thecase forEmpire. Readers mayrecallpassages whichtheywouldhaveliked,tos.eincluded in one or other of the volumes,but within the limits which the editors have setforthemselves,they have been remarkably successful in illustrating aspects of theBritish political tradition bymeans of selections varied, representative, and of historical interest. TheUnivers/ty ofBritish Columbia Understanding History: A Primer o.Historical Method. ByLou.s GOTTSCHALK.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf Toronto:McClelland& Stewart.1950. PaOFESSOR Goa.rsc.LX hasfornearly twenty years takena leading partin teaching alaboratory course inhistorical method intheUniversity of Chicago, andthisvoltune, portions ofwhich have already appeared in print,represents thefruits ofhisexperience onthesubiect. Thebook isdivided intothree parts.
Firstcomes 'Objectives of Historians,' with chapters on the evaluation of historical writingandtherelation of historical method to life andlearning. PartII dealswith methods of historical research (historical sources and subiectsof research, external andinternal evidence, historical technique). Part III, 'Theory ofHistory,' discusses theselection ofmaterials, historical causation, andthehistorian andpresent dayproblems.
Asbefits itssubti,tle of'Primer' thebook isrelatively brief.Theauthor is more concerned toestab.sh principles andgivedirection thantoworkoutthe subject at length. Heknows theproblems andpitfalls ofthehistorian andis balanced in hisiudgments. In short, without beingparticularly original in healanent orcontent, thevolume should bea valuable aidto students engaged in learning howto writehistory. Bu.ttherearelimitsto whatcanbe learned fromcourses in historical method.
History writing, astheauthor says in his preface, isanartaswellasa social science, andiustasthepainter learns by studying theworks of thegreat masters, sothewould-be historian mustturn totheworks ofthegreat historians andwriters ofEnglish,tolearn byexample aswellasbyprecept. Nodoubt Dr.Gottschalk would agree. Butit ishardly enough when referring to 'style andcomposition' (p. 186) to content himsel.withrecommending thepossession of dictionaries andmanuals of correct English.
FLENLEY TheUniversity ofToronto.